Bulwark-Class Battlecruiser
#41
Posted 06 April 2008 - 01:36 AM
#42
Posted 06 April 2008 - 03:45 PM
Oh yeah. That's true, sorry. Been a while since geometry...So 682,666.667 cubic kilometers. 68,266.667 cubic kilometers of solid matter, which still is going to mass more than low-grade steel, which would put it at 4,778,666,666,666.667-ish kilograms. Again, that's enough to catch the Executor, which itself masses a lot, which would strengthen the pull of gravity.Anything with a diameter of 160 kilometers is going to have enough mass for a pretty strong gravity field. 17,157,284.679 cubic kilometers of volume. If the Death Star were made of exclusively low-grade steel, it would mass at 134,684,684,728,619.701 kg. And I'm sure the density of the materials used to construct the Death Star had a greater density. That's quite enough to capture the silly little Executor don't you think?
The death star didn't mass that much. http://www.swrpgnetw...uth20040810.pdf Your volume is off by a factor of 17 (I think that you confused diameter and radius, and forgot to cut in half for completion percentage.) Also, the death star was hollow, with an estimated 1:10 volume to solid volume ratio.
#43
Posted 06 April 2008 - 07:49 PM
Oh yeah. That's true, sorry. Been a while since geometry...So 682,666.667 cubic kilometers. 68,266.667 cubic kilometers of solid matter, which still is going to mass more than low-grade steel, which would put it at 4,778,666,666,666.667-ish kilograms. Again, that's enough to catch the Executor, which itself masses a lot, which would strengthen the pull of gravity.Anything with a diameter of 160 kilometers is going to have enough mass for a pretty strong gravity field. 17,157,284.679 cubic kilometers of volume. If the Death Star were made of exclusively low-grade steel, it would mass at 134,684,684,728,619.701 kg. And I'm sure the density of the materials used to construct the Death Star had a greater density. That's quite enough to capture the silly little Executor don't you think?
The death star didn't mass that much. http://www.swrpgnetw...uth20040810.pdf Your volume is off by a factor of 17 (I think that you confused diameter and radius, and forgot to cut in half for completion percentage.) Also, the death star was hollow, with an estimated 1:10 volume to solid volume ratio.
I think it didn't mass that much. Plus, the Executor would have to be really close to be caught before control could be re-established, or just had some other problem.
#44
Posted 28 April 2008 - 01:22 PM
Oh yeah. That's true, sorry. Been a while since geometry...So 682,666.667 cubic kilometers. 68,266.667 cubic kilometers of solid matter, which still is going to mass more than low-grade steel, which would put it at 4,778,666,666,666.667-ish kilograms. Again, that's enough to catch the Executor, which itself masses a lot, which would strengthen the pull of gravity.Anything with a diameter of 160 kilometers is going to have enough mass for a pretty strong gravity field. 17,157,284.679 cubic kilometers of volume. If the Death Star were made of exclusively low-grade steel, it would mass at 134,684,684,728,619.701 kg. And I'm sure the density of the materials used to construct the Death Star had a greater density. That's quite enough to capture the silly little Executor don't you think?
The death star didn't mass that much. http://www.swrpgnetw...uth20040810.pdf Your volume is off by a factor of 17 (I think that you confused diameter and radius, and forgot to cut in half for completion percentage.) Also, the death star was hollow, with an estimated 1:10 volume to solid volume ratio.
I think it didn't mass that much. Plus, the Executor would have to be really close to be caught before control could be re-established, or just had some other problem.
What does any of the last like, 2 pages have to do with the bulwark?
#46
Posted 28 April 2008 - 08:46 PM
I guess nothing.That's a really good question.What does any of the last like, 2 pages have to do with the bulwark?
the excutor was likely the first of its class, and as a result, thought to be invincible, and auxillirary systems were not nessary.
have to aggre with tropical bob on the gravity, and i would think that the death star itself was using a gravity well generator to supplement any mass deficiencies.
Now, thinking logically, would not all excutor-class shipos produced later on be designed against this aparent design flaw (bridge so esposed, and critical) and later ships would be better designed
#47
Posted 28 April 2008 - 09:03 PM
"Welcome to the jolly old death star."
"Vader gets the plesure of killing someone while we get to stay among the living. Private Perkins overhere has been stranged over 30 times haven't you Perkins." "Good man."
#48
Posted 29 April 2008 - 05:16 AM
Also i don't see how the Lusankya could not have taken damage to it's external structure (i.e. guns and such) when it erupted from Coruscant's surface.
There is no passion, there is serenity. There is no death, there is the Force.
#49
Posted 29 April 2008 - 02:55 PM
also keep in mind that the Lusankya was built at the same time as the excutor under the same name so it couldn't benefit form any upgrades to the class developed from experience after the excutor's loss... i think if i remember everything right that was how it was built.
Also i don't see how the Lusankya could not have taken damage to it's external structure (i.e. guns and such) when it erupted from Coruscant's surface.
The Empire most likely had the mountian lined with explolsives that got rid of most of the mountian, without causing Lusankya much harm.
Edited by Ba Boracus, 29 April 2008 - 02:56 PM.
#50
Posted 29 April 2008 - 09:53 PM
Likely the initial explosives and turbolaser volleys vaporized most of the material that could have harmed it, and then it being an Executor-class ship, had very powerful shields to protect it. It probably did take damage, but only superficial for the most part. They repaired any damage before or upon arrival at Thyferra.
#51
Posted 29 April 2008 - 11:13 PM
There is no passion, there is serenity. There is no death, there is the Force.
#53
Posted 30 April 2008 - 07:12 PM
It was. Still, it was under a group of buildings, and was almost certainly buried so it could lift without serious damage.also keep in mind that the Lusankya was built at the same time as the excutor under the same name so it couldn't benefit form any upgrades to the class developed from experience after the excutor's loss... i think if i remember everything right that was how it was built.
Also i don't see how the Lusankya could not have taken damage to it's external structure (i.e. guns and such) when it erupted from Coruscant's surface.
It came out from underneath the city itself didn't it?
It's been awhile since I've read them, but ddn't Lusankya take a good chunk of the Manari mountians with it?
No, it was buried under the city itself.
#54
Posted 01 May 2008 - 09:29 PM
Anyway...The whole point of burying the Lusankya under the city in the first place was with the intention of freeing it, so, as Kaleb mentioned, it was most likely meant to take the minimum damage possible. Apparently, it took more damage from the Golan stations than it did from the city, and any planetary-based defenses.
#55
Posted 01 May 2008 - 09:40 PM
"Welcome to the jolly old death star."
"Vader gets the plesure of killing someone while we get to stay among the living. Private Perkins overhere has been stranged over 30 times haven't you Perkins." "Good man."
#57
Posted 16 June 2008 - 02:21 AM
Edited by blue4n, 16 June 2008 - 02:22 AM.
#58
Posted 16 June 2008 - 12:27 PM
Most SDs have idiotic designs.Now, thinking logically, would not all excutor-class shipos produced later on be designed against this aparent design flaw (bridge so esposed, and critical) and later ships would be better designed
A bridge should be buried at the core of a battleship
making use of video (hologram) feeds, radars and whatever high-tech stuff to see outside.
Anyways,
anyone still interested in talking about the Bulwark problem?
Edited by Pred the Penguin, 16 June 2008 - 12:28 PM.
#59
Posted 16 June 2008 - 01:13 PM
True on the bridge. Still, a lot of ships are designed poorly. And what Bulwark problem?Most SDs have idiotic designs.Now, thinking logically, would not all excutor-class shipos produced later on be designed against this aparent design flaw (bridge so esposed, and critical) and later ships would be better designed
A bridge should be buried at the core of a battleship
making use of video (hologram) feeds, radars and whatever high-tech stuff to see outside.
Anyways,
anyone still interested in talking about the Bulwark problem?
Reply to this topic
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users